The Chrysler Minivan Fan Club Forums banner

1 - 20 of 80 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
256 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Has anyone messed with these? I do not see how it can hurt (its just hydrogen and oxygen) and its cheap and easy to build so I am going to try building one for my voyager.

Figure even if it does not work I will have a wicked cool hydrogen generator to play with :)

Has anyone tried it? Got any results? I am going to try to build a system capable of pumping 6L/min and see what I get

I am almost done fixing my voyager all up. Once everything is tip top and I have some good solid weekly mpg readings then I will try to build one and "see what happens"
 

·
Latent car nut
Joined
·
8,965 Posts
Has anyone messed with these? I do not see how it can hurt (its just hydrogen and oxygen) and its cheap and easy to build so I am going to try building one for my voyager.

Figure even if it does not work I will have a wicked cool hydrogen generator to play with :)

Has anyone tried it? Got any results? I am going to try to build a system capable of pumping 6L/min and see what I get

I am almost done fixing my voyager all up. Once everything is tip top and I have some good solid weekly mpg readings then I will try to build one and "see what happens"
Hydrogen generation consumes more power in the form of electricity than it will yield in extra power. If that wasn't the case then you'd have a "Perpetual Motion" machine, a device that is physically impossible to create.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
256 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
ok shipo let me explain something

this is a topic I am pretty good at (not hydrogen but physics and economics) because your confusing the two.

first anytime you here someone say but it takes more energy in than you get out you can be certain (please take no offense) they know very little about physics chemistry the universe etc..

shipo listencarefully. EVERY SINGLE THING YOU DO OR CAN DÒ will always be more energy in than out.

when you say hydrogen generation takes more energy than you get your not stating a fact. your stating a blatantly obvious can not be any other way fact. a "duh" fact.

conservation of mass energy. iirc 2nd law of thermodynamics..

ALL ENERGY TRANSACTIONS ARE LOSSY IE MORE ENERGY WILL ALWAYS GO IN THAN YOU WILL GET OUT.

this is as far as we know an indisputable inviolable law of out universe ie entropy.

your gas car hydro car hybrid car electric car fart powered car your steam boat your bicycle your feet walking you across the room zero point energy your and my fingers typing on this message board ALL take more energy to do than we will ever get out. period.

ok that's the physics side and its not really up for much discussion because many many much smarter than us people have decided this is true namely almo every genius scientist in history ie people much smarter than you and I are.

ok NOW lets talk about the side we can discuss. economics.

all that matters in an energy transfer system for our cars is NOT energy per mile (which is irrelevant) what is relevant is DOLLARS PER MILE.

so if I inject H2 into my car what's important is what did that H2 cost me in dollars.

lets see gas is $3 a gallon while electricity is .000136 cents a watt.

so for $3 I can generate 22,000 watts of electricity. see the difference here. I watched a video where a guy made an H2 system that coul pump out 6 liters per minute hydrogen for 90 minuter on 2 165 amp car batteries.

know how much "money" it costs to recharge 2 car batteries?

about 25 cents.

if it extends my range by 2 miles a per charge its cheaper (not necessarily more efficient) than gasoline.

I do not car how efficient it is I careone how much does it cost per mile.

one guy claims to have gotten 46 mpg out of his 24mpg 97 pickup. if I can get half that improvement it will be worth it.

its also very cheap to build a hydrogen generator around 20-30 dollars in parts. so I figure why not if nothing else it will be fun.

so remember energy in is irrelevant dollars in is irrelevant. even if hydrogen is 100 times less efficient than gas if it costs 1000 times less to make then its 100 times as dollar efficient.

stop thinking energy per mile (irrelevant) and think dollars per mile (all that matters).

oh and it takes hundreds of times the energy you get from gasoline as it takes to get refine and pump that gas into your car.! but it costs a lot less than they can charge you for it.
 

·
Latent car nut
Joined
·
8,965 Posts
I'll say this one last time, trying to do what you're suggesting is a money per mile losing proposition. Period, full stop, the end.

That said, since you seem to know so much, carry on McDuff.
 

·
PT Driver
Joined
·
2,674 Posts
Well I have never messed with hydrogen myself, I have had friends who have messed with it a bit. the one thing about hydrogen is after the combustion process in an engine it turns back into water, so the long term effect is your exhaust manifold and exhaust system as a whole will probably rust from the inside out, but don't let this discourage you. There is a trucking company not sure which one though. but they outfitted their trucks to run not only on diesel, but with an injection of hydrogen, increasing the trucks fuel mileage, meaning the driver has to pay less for fuel. I'm sure you already know that hydrogen is also 5 times MORE explosive than gasoline, so the amount you'd put in an engine should be about 1/5 that of how much gasoline you'd inject. :thumb:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
256 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
wow shipo you made it pretty clear you did not read my message at all abd that you did not read your own message either or your just a liar. you said will consume more electricity than it will save in gas YOUR WORDS not mine so where is the one more time ? oh you meant first trade time since your first post mentioned about dollars per mile but did prattle on about silly things like perpetual motion.

go educate your self before trying to chew me a new one. if you really think hydrogen will not even save me 1/12th of a gallon (thats all it needs to offset to break even) then I am not sure what universe your from where you consider that not even worth trying.

Benny

that was my first thought too. couple things. the system already puts out a decent amount of water without H2 and seems to take it ok. second its pretty hot in there hot enough that liquid water can not exist so its steam. third my car has 200k on clock I see several ibt of pipe that I am going to have to replace soon. way I see it I am looking at some exhaust work soon would rather try this before I do the work thab after if it does not work no real loss since I need to do the work anyway if it does work might be worth sticking a stainless exhaust on there. but rust is definitely on my radar as something to watch for.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
256 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
My last two posts were from my pda boy even with a qwerty keyboards thats hard work on such a small unit :)

anyway shipo for the last time implies you had a first time you DID NOT.

I quote "Hydrogen generation consumes more power in the form of electricity than it will yield in extra power."

This is confusing on its face. I am not seeking more POWER as in Horsepower I am seeking more power as in available energy to go further on less fuel. SINCE MPG is the discussion at hand I will assume you meant MPG not POWER. Honestly I do not care if its WEAKER I already have far more power than I need a little less would mean nothing to me I want efficiency. I was even considering putting a 4cyl engine in this to get better fuel economy but its a HEAVY van which explains why the EPA rating for the 4cyl is not much better than the 6cyl.

Nothing in there about costing more per mile until your SECOND post. So please at least clue in on what you yourself are saying.

Based on your first post I replied accordingly and POLITELY no less. I spent a considerable amount of my personal time to try to relay information that might be useful to you and you just turned around and bit me.

Well no matter what you say I am going to try this. Why? Well that's easy. First its CHEAP. its going to cost me no more than maybe $30 probably under $20 in parts (I already have a bunch of tubing lying around somewhere) all I really need to buy is some stainless plates and some stainless connectors. maybe $15 in parts.

I already have everything else including a good deep cycle battery. SO my cost to try this? a few dollars. My Risk? Almost ZERO

EVEN IF IT FAILS I end up with a very interesting and fun Hydrogen Generator to play with. SO there is simply no downside.

You second comment is just plain wrong. the MAX cost to me to recharge this battery is about 12 cents in electricity. SO My max loss if I try it say 10 times is $1.20 I will know by 10 trips if its going to save me any money or not.

Again its a lossless endeavor there is just no downside. I am curious why you are so strongly adamant with your reply and why you selected to get nasty even though I did not do so and in fact tried to educate you on the potential.

I have no idea if its going to work. but ENOUGH people seem to think it will and the risk is ZERO and cost is ZERO (since I will have a use for it outside the car and even then its not even $20) that its a no brainer to try.

I spend almost $4000 a year in gasoline. If this can get me say 40mpg thats over $1500 a year in savings. a new exhaust is $300 even if it rusts it out once a year its well worth it it to save $1200 a year. (again IF it works)

can a car run on hydrogen? YES I have seen it done. Mythbusters busted one of these hydroxy generators (it put out so little gas I could see it would have no effect at all IE a scam) SO they decided to see if it would run at all on hydrogen and GET THIS they shoved the hose into the carburator and holy crap the car ran on PURE hydrogen and TWICE no less.

I was miffed that they dropped it there and did not even MENTION anything beyond that Holy crap you RAN a regular gas car on pure hydrogen case. NOW thats was a LOT of hydrogen far more than I am likely to generate but it does say the car CAN and WILL burn it. IE the idea has merit.

The question is will it be enough to equal a savings at the fuel pump. I don't know thats why I want to try it out and "see" what happens.

Will it cost me in electricity what I save? NO way. Electricity is so cheap its not even worth calculating into my fuel costs. its meaningless. In fact I already have a solar panel that can charge a battery in a single day so in theory it will cost me NOTHING in electricity if one battery can make the round trip to work.

Gasoline. You think its magically perpetual motion? clearly in your statement you STATE that this will cost me more in E than I will save in gas.

This CLEARLY implies you think you get MORE out of gas than was put into it.

Clearly you are NOT educated in the sciences even elementarily or you would understand this is as far as our science understands is impossible. ALL transactions are LOSSY. Entropy and all that.

it takes HUNDREDS of times the energy to PUT a gallon of gasoline into your car than we WILL EVER be able to extract from that gallon. HUNDREDS of times.

thats not the issue the issue is I can SELL you a gallon for more than it costs me in dollars to GET that gallon into your car IE profit.

Electricity is cheap. Thats not up for discussion to me. The question is will I gain anything.

Unless you have tried it your not qualified to tell me no. Neither am I qualified to tell you YES it will. But its certainly enough to warrant a TRY.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,508 Posts
I've been toying with one in my Hyundai Elantra. Due to the space under hood, I've considered adding it to my 1990 PGV mini-van, however, I can't get it from my wife long enough to try it. Hence, the Elantra.

I've been to other forums where several people are getting 60+ MPG on their Toyota's and Saturn's. YouTube is a good place to start looking, search there for "HHO" .

The real trick is to convince the engine's computer nothing has changed, otherwise, it "adjusts" the fuel flow to "compensate" for the added oxygen the O2 sensor is seeing in the exhaust (thinking it's too lean, so it adds more fuel). The computers keep the "back yard" mechanic from getting more MPG from a vehicle. There is also information on those sites "how to trick" it to give you more MPG with an HHO to assist.

The HHO provides a more complete burn of the gas (Hence more MPG, Duh!). Word is that certain types of spark plugs (type of metal used in the plug) will actually defeat the HHO, though.

BTW, If you have a CNG adapter on your engine, there are a couple of HHO generator designs, using electronic circuits, that provide enough continuous output to actually run the vehicle on straight HHO, instead of CNG. But a combination will give you the MAX - MPG.

IT DOES WORK ! ! ! !
:thewave:
 

·
Latent car nut
Joined
·
8,965 Posts
Sorry AzTraveller, but extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof, and so far at least, the actual scientific studies on this subject prove quite convincingly that HHO modifications to cars is about as effective at improving miles per gallon as any other hair-brained scheme out there. Said another way, it doesn't work. Any anecdotal report of 60+ mpg from a run of the mill Toyota or Saturn is just a bunch of noise.
 

·
PT Driver
Joined
·
2,674 Posts
Shipo, i have seen claims of people putting hydrogen on thier cars and getting 45+ mpg. Like this (its not a saturn but an escort wagon, my sister has a very similar car and it averages around 35 mpg) and they are saying the HHO boosted gas mileage by 50%
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pa1meqFFjjM
Shipo, don't be so close minded. running on Hydrogen is very possible (and an idea I like) and the gas mileage is boosted when your car is injected with the HHO. Infact my sister is looking into another car, so when she does get a new car that will be my chance to try running a car with HHO injection. When and if I do that I will post the mpg gains (or as Shipo may want to believe losses) on here. :thumb:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
256 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
ok shipo I am certainly not going to take your word on it.

show me this scientific proof that it can not work and make sure its not sourced from big oil

you said it so put up show me your proof.

azt that what I heard too that it confuses the computer.

I factually know a car can run on H2 you may not dispute this shipo as I have actually seen it done twice on national television I will be sure to get you a copy of that.

I am curious as to what quantity of h2 I would need to run on pure hydrogen. I have a feeling this would require a battery pack so big that I would at that time already have a battery large enough to make a bev. but what about at idle.?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,508 Posts
Wrong Forum ?????

Maybe you're simply in the wrong forum. Try this one;

http://www.fuel-saver.org/Forum/showthread.php?tid=181

:lol:

It's not H2, it's also O. They call it HHO, because the hydrogen and oxygen are free, not combined. There is more power in hydrogen gas, than is in gasoline, add the Oxygen and you've definitely got an explosion.

But you have to "trick" your computer to make it work, otherwise, the computer senses the additional oxygen (cleaner exhaust) and dumps more fuel in defeating the whole thing.
 

·
PT Driver
Joined
·
2,674 Posts
But you have to "trick" your computer to make it work, otherwise, the computer senses the additional oxygen (cleaner exhaust) and dumps more fuel in defeating the whole thing.
Thats why instead of Fuel injection you stick a carb on it that way, no computer to trick. or you could have a device to create a fake code for the computer to read and think that the o2 sensors are reading ok, so it doesn't dump anymore fuel in it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
256 Posts
Discussion Starter #15
Well I want to help other mini owners as well thats why I am in the alternative fuels section :)

Carb is a nogo I want the reliability and efficiency of the EFI system. I hear there are 2 possible ways to overcome this on older cars (which mine might be) you can sometimes reset the ECU ECM whatever and get it to "learn" the new fuel mixture.

Its not that there is more O2 thats a falacy since O2 is coming into the air intake in prodigious amounts and so is the O2 from this the engine computer will adjust the "intake" air volume to compensate for this.

you are right though the "exhaust" will be "different" with the H2 burning. Cleaner different whatever the result is the computer gets fritzed and decides it should dump more fuel into the mixture ruining any gains you might have gotten and making the engine run like crap maybe.

SO I can either rest the ECU or "spoof" the O2 sensor output. I will worry about that when the time comes.

If enough people get this to work people will get involved and start figuring out how to reprogram these computers. I could even forsee people recording the "fuel curve" from the injectors without H2 in the system and then "forcing" adjusted injector curves when you turn on the gas to keep the system harmonious.

**** I could just put a variable resistor on the fuel pump in my 74 thing and TURN DOWN the fuel flow as I turn up the gas flow till I get a balance.

and NO its H2 or H and H the extra O is irrelevant. its there whether it comes from the water or not. IE its not relevant to the math for our applications.

The point is a new fuel for combustion is introduced so in theory your car needs to use LESS gasoline. The question is only WILL it be enough to warrant doing it.
 

·
PT Driver
Joined
·
2,674 Posts
Well I want to help other mini owners as well thats why I am in the alternative fuels section :)

Carb is a nogo I want the reliability and efficiency of the EFI system. I hear there are 2 possible ways to overcome this on older cars (which mine might be) you can sometimes reset the ECU ECM whatever and get it to "learn" the new fuel mixture.

Its not that there is more O2 thats a falacy since O2 is coming into the air intake in prodigious amounts and so is the O2 from this the engine computer will adjust the "intake" air volume to compensate for this.

you are right though the "exhaust" will be "different" with the H2 burning. Cleaner different whatever the result is the computer gets fritzed and decides it should dump more fuel into the mixture ruining any gains you might have gotten and making the engine run like crap maybe.

SO I can either rest the ECU or "spoof" the O2 sensor output. I will worry about that when the time comes.

If enough people get this to work people will get involved and start figuring out how to reprogram these computers. I could even forsee people recording the "fuel curve" from the injectors without H2 in the system and then "forcing" adjusted injector curves when you turn on the gas to keep the system harmonious.

**** I could just put a variable resistor on the fuel pump in my 74 thing and TURN DOWN the fuel flow as I turn up the gas flow till I get a balance.

and NO its H2 or H and H the extra O is irrelevant. its there whether it comes from the water or not. IE its not relevant to the math for our applications.

The point is a new fuel for combustion is introduced so in theory your car needs to use LESS gasoline. The question is only WILL it be enough to warrant doing it.
the learn thing might work, but I'd make it even simpler (just thought of this don't know why I didn't think of it earlier) but pull the plug to the o2 sensor, it will trip the CEL but it will run the engine using presets in the ECU, of course having the CEL tripped can be a problem when a real code is tripped, you'd never know it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,508 Posts
the learn thing might work, but I'd make it even simpler (just thought of this don't know why I didn't think of it earlier) but pull the plug to the o2 sensor, it will trip the CEL but it will run the engine using presets in the ECU, of course having the CEL tripped can be a problem when a real code is tripped, you'd never know it.
Removing the O2 sensor isn't going to work. The computer relies on this input. They have small units you can make (if you're good with electronic parts -- resistors, transistors, IC's, etc.) or you can buy one. They connect between the O2 sensor and the computer. It allows you to "lean" out the fuel mix, while the computer thinks it's still rich. Since the fuel is burning "better", the O2 sensor thinks there's too much Oxygen in the exhaust, hence the spoofing needed to keep it from dumping more gas to compensate.

Some people have gotten the "anti-fouler" plug adapters, one that fits the O2 sensor threads and drill the interior larger. This removes the O2 sensor from directly in the exhaust path, making it send a "rich" signal, making the computer "lean" the mix out.

The electronic way is preferable, because you can adjust the amount of "lean" you want, without tripping the CEL.

Some vehicles also require that you spoof the MAF and/or MAP sensor, too. There are circuits for that, as well.

Take a look throughout that forum I listed previously, you'll find the references to the electronic mods needed.

A CARB is preferable, because you can make all kinds of changes to them, but EFI is like the MFR is watching your every step with the engine and if you make it do something other than what the program says, it compensates, or you get the CEL. They only allow you to get so much economy, then they slap your hand. The "re-learn" only works for about a week, then the computer catches on and "richens the mix", putting you back to square one, or worse.

Any programmer buffs here, may wish to dump the ECU chip, decypher the code and re-write it for a leaner mixture. Be fore warned, if you lean an engine out too much without the HHO, you CAN burn valves. They talk about a cylinder temp gauge, as well as a pyrometer, to monitor excessive exhaust heat buildup.

The HHO also acts as a "cooling" agent (similar to water injection used in the 1970's). Otherwise, the ECU will richen the mix to cool the exhaust (but that drops your MPG).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
256 Posts
Discussion Starter #18
Good Stuff AZ I think the O2 is going to be easy. I was not aware it was a simple voltage output between .2 and .9 I am thinking a simple POT to "SEND" .2 to .9 v to the computer IE override the O2 sensor all together.

I am thinking hook a meter to it and see what the proper voltage is. Once I turn on the HHO I just monitor this output see what the computer "does" and then I undo it by overriding the output voltage with my own.

If normal operating voltage is .35 and it goes to .45 when I turn on the HHO I then override this and send .35 which is what it would normally be getting. a DPDT switch will allow me to switch between running on my voltage and the normal o2 sensor. that should actually be pretty easy to do.

and as I ramp up I can even intentionally lean the mixture more but I want to shy away from that since I do not have enough knowledge to know how to do that properly without damaging the engine.

I think the guy getting 89mpg with the computer did it this way. He was getting so much of his power from his hydrogen generation (over a gallon of water in 103 miles thats a CRAP load of hydrogen) he said he barely had to touch the accelerator pedal to maintain speed. This makes sense. whats the other thing that controls the quantity of fuel going in besides the computer? YOUR FOOT.

So if you pumping so much hydrogen in there that the engine is almost running on the hydrogen then you off course could "let off" the gas quite a bit as you burn more and more hydrogen.

I wonder if he had "surging" when he tried to slow down since as he slowed he would need less fuel but the HHO rig would just keep on pumping out the gas at the same rate.

I REALLY need to take a ride in this kids car to figure out whats going on there.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,508 Posts
Manually leaning out the mixture is where the pyrometer, or cylinder temp gauge comes in. You can actually "see" what the behavior is to your adjustments. There is a section that discusses the pyrometer, and cylinder gauge and what to expect for readings.

NO, you CANNOT simply place a "pot" in place of the O2 sensor. The O2 sensor puts out a "pulse" at a specific frequency, based upon exhaust temperature, as well as the .02 - 0.9 volts determining how much O2 it senses in the exhaust. An Oscilloscope will show you the pulse and voltage. You have to use a "Quality" volt meter, or the resistance of the meter will cause a change in the signal, as seen by the computer. The electronic "spoofer" has a high resistance and allows adjustment of "both" signals without loading the signal down. AND really isn't that expensive. There are several sources for them.

Spend a couple of days browsing that forum for info, your head will spin with so much input, but after a week of thought, it will all fall into place in your mind and, besides, you can always ask questions.

But READ, and READ for a few days before asking questions. Most of the answers are there, if you simply look at what others have done, first.

Good journey ......
:beerchug:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
256 Posts
Discussion Starter #20
Oh I am I am only about a third the way through that thread you sent me to. Just starting to get into the good stuff but I like to read from start to finish.

When I said pot I did not mean to goto radioshack and buy a $2 potentiometer and hey done. but it IS a simple a a pot IE good analogy. I was not aware of the dual signal (I was thinking regulated variable power supply but the pulse changes that.

Got any links for that spoofer?

Its going to consume a ton of my time now. TONS of good into on these forums and that other forums is looking enticing now too :)

Either way I am building one of these buggers. They are so stinking cheap to build (WHY are they charging $300 for those kits? I could make a killing selling them for $100 depending on how easy it turns out to be) I want MORE people to have these not less (IF they work that is)

Either way its going to be fun. I have had trouble lately finding cool fun projects that do not cost a fortune. I just sold my two diesel cars at least tentatively so I should be able to get my Geo Metro soon but I may hold off this I see how this works out since I would rather have my minivan at 40-50mpg than a metro at 80mpg anyday :) I love my voyager. SO comfortable so nice a ride. LOTS of head room :)

I am also thinking maybe an easy way to handle this is to develope a chart of fuel consumption based on temperature density weather season etc.. and Literally restrict the fuel flow to what I desire so it does not matter what the computer wants it gets X gallons an hour and thats it.

The only problem I see is real time regulation getting tedious as I have to constantly tweak the fuel flow.

I am still wondering HOW MUCH hydrogen do I need to stop using gasoline all together?

My first problem was can you get enough hydrogen in a cylinder to make effective combustion for propulsion. Mythbusters confirmed that yes you can.

The second is how many batteries will it take. I am not TOO worried about how many batteries you see I CAN AFFORD batteries. Jut buy one every 2 weeks till I have enough.

NO it will not be anywhere near as efficient as an electric car but BEV's are not relevant since I can not afford the $2000 electric motor and $1500 controller.

I can afford to build a H2 generator once a week with $30 in parts. I wonder what the long term effect on the engine is to doing this. Wonder what the Emissions results would be :)

Junker $400 cars are easy to come buy sooo I just might have to try it if generating that much gas proves feasible.
 
1 - 20 of 80 Posts
Top